How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 13)
Discussion
stongle said:
The UK & Germany friendship deal was something dreamt up in Germany. I think there was genuine concern on a hard BREXIT driving a wedge between closely politically and economically aligned allies. As you mentioned previously we could be perceived as the EU bogeyman, but the Germans and Dutch would be in the same boat.
What it would like, not sure. I think they wanted to test EU boundaries; but it may come to nought. However, if states like Italy are going to HAVE to break budget rules, its arguable that trade friction is as much an priority in Germany and why not bend / break trade rules.
The action by the EC to prevent outside EU takeovers may have the immediate effect of staving off Chinese vultures, but longer term they are in a pickle as they are printing there way out of s
t. Certainly the banks are going to be in the st and needing support. Banking Union is a fantasy now, unlikely anyone has the capital to do it. Rather than allow rest of world in, they are going to have to nationalise them OR let them fail....
I dont see these Corona measures going away in the short to medium term; it's going to change the negotiating dynamic. I dont think anyone would expend huge amounts of political capital on a fudge, so it's all or nothing. Macron could be the big loser here, if he doubles down on fishing or FS. If he pushes for a deal, he gets back capital with the Northern bloc.
I see future problems on the issue of state aid post Corona. Vestager already put a fudge in, that any bank led rehypothecation of ECB funds wouldn't be state aid. It's against the sport of the WA. Regardless it was a necessary step. Its going to cause issues.
You're practicing wishfull thinking from a UK perspective. What it would like, not sure. I think they wanted to test EU boundaries; but it may come to nought. However, if states like Italy are going to HAVE to break budget rules, its arguable that trade friction is as much an priority in Germany and why not bend / break trade rules.
The action by the EC to prevent outside EU takeovers may have the immediate effect of staving off Chinese vultures, but longer term they are in a pickle as they are printing there way out of s
t. Certainly the banks are going to be in the st and needing support. Banking Union is a fantasy now, unlikely anyone has the capital to do it. Rather than allow rest of world in, they are going to have to nationalise them OR let them fail....I dont see these Corona measures going away in the short to medium term; it's going to change the negotiating dynamic. I dont think anyone would expend huge amounts of political capital on a fudge, so it's all or nothing. Macron could be the big loser here, if he doubles down on fishing or FS. If he pushes for a deal, he gets back capital with the Northern bloc.
I see future problems on the issue of state aid post Corona. Vestager already put a fudge in, that any bank led rehypothecation of ECB funds wouldn't be state aid. It's against the sport of the WA. Regardless it was a necessary step. Its going to cause issues.
And it seems that some on here see the Brexit negotiations allong the lines of a simple, partisan, battle between nations. If you leave out the nationalism, being pragmatic; it's both in the EU and the UK interest that they reach a deal.
Obviously the UK has all the right to negotiate a favourable trade deal. Except there are clear lines, the foundations of the European internal market for instance, the 4 freedoms; free movement of goods, capital, services and persons. If the UK doesn't wan't to adhere to those principles or other rules which guarantee a level playing field, well that's ok, but you can't have all the good without having the bad. And what's the point of the EU when the EU gives a third country favourable access and conditions, while at the same time that third country undermines EU principles and practices leveraging its position for instance as a sell out, a cheap back door to US and Chinese country's, or as a fiscal free haven.
You mentioned earlier that once the UK get's up to speed again the EU will need a deal with the UK. Don't you think that when 1 country leaves the trading bloc of 28 countries, the changes for that 1 country will be much bigger than for the other 27. In other words, the UK will need the EU as an export partner more than vice versa. That's simple logic, a simple calculation of the current trade volumes.
Considering the protecionism as you called it, It's all about a level playing field. EU companies enjoy only limited access to some foreign markets (China for instance). Whitin the EU there are rules to combat both intervention by the public authorities and state aid to companies (think of the Arab/turkye airline industry, Chinese R&D, building company's and tech ), these rules do not apply to players outside the EU to the same extent. Furthermore vital knowledge leaks out of the EU, while the EU companies do not have the same opportunities to gain similar knowledge from other third countries by means of takeovers. So it's more than logical that the EU protects businesses and vital infrastructure against takeovers.
Edited by DeltonaS on Friday 27th March 17:18
crankedup said:
Murph7355 said:
Helicopter123 said:
Good job that the NHS has that extra £350m a week then, eh Boris?
Do you practice making yourself look an absolute nobber or does it come naturally? If it needs practice I bet you and everyone you know are glad you're having to self isolate right now.Helicopter123 said:
crankedup said:
Murph7355 said:
Helicopter123 said:
Good job that the NHS has that extra £350m a week then, eh Boris?
Do you practice making yourself look an absolute nobber or does it come naturally? If it needs practice I bet you and everyone you know are glad you're having to self isolate right now.Utterly ridiculous by any measure, it's the sort of thing MX5nut would pop on the forum and state.
Doubling down won't help you.
Helicopter123 said:
crankedup said:
Murph7355 said:
Helicopter123 said:
Good job that the NHS has that extra £350m a week then, eh Boris?
Do you practice making yourself look an absolute nobber or does it come naturally? If it needs practice I bet you and everyone you know are glad you're having to self isolate right now.Garibaldi_red said:
Helicopter123 said:
Thank you, but I'm afraid that this is no laughing matter.
General concerns appears to be that you really are a laughing matter!Any non 'ultra' Brexit position on here is quickly jumped on by the usual suspects, a group 'pile on'.
Attempts at 'no-platforming' are sinister but luckily I'm just not intimidated.
I understand their agenda and call it out frequently, which they don't like, but in reality all I'm doing is holding up a mirror.
Helicopter123 said:
Garibaldi_red said:
Helicopter123 said:
Thank you, but I'm afraid that this is no laughing matter.
General concerns appears to be that you really are a laughing matter!Any non 'ultra' Brexit position on here is quickly jumped on by the usual suspects, a group 'pile on'.
Attempts at 'no-platforming' are sinister but luckily I'm just not intimidated.
I understand their agenda and call it out frequently, which they don't like, but in reality all I'm doing is holding up a mirror.
The latter was why one of your posts was removed, it was removed by the moderators.
You need to hold the mirror the right way round, you'll see your own reflection, something you should reflect on when writing the type of posts you do.
Sway said:
don'tbesilly said:
Are you suggesting that something suggested during the referendum back in 2016, now four years ago, can be used as ammunition against the Govt right now?
Especially with recent budgets, and emergency increases, taking us way beyond £350M a week extra... DeltonaS said:
You're practicing wishfull thinking from a UK perspective.
And it seems that some on here see the Brexit negotiations allong the lines of a simple, partisan, battle between nations. If you leave out the nationalism, being pragmatic; it's both in the EU and the UK interest that they reach a deal.
Obviously the UK has all the right to negotiate a favourable trade deal. Except there are clear lines, the foundations of the European internal market for instance, the 4 freedoms; free movement of goods, capital, services and persons. If the UK doesn't wan't to adhere to those principles or other rules which guarantee a level playing field, well that's ok, but you can't have all the good without having the bad. And what's the point of the EU when the EU gives a third country favourable access and conditions, while at the same time that third country undermines EU principles and practices leveraging its position for instance as a sell out, a cheap back door to US and Chinese country's, or as a fiscal free haven.
You mentioned earlier that once the UK get's up to speed again the EU will need a deal with the UK. Don't you think that when 1 country leaves the trading bloc of 28 countries, the changes for that 1 country will be much bigger than for the other 27. In other words, the UK will need the EU as an export partner more than vice versa. That's simple logic, a simple calculation of the current trade volumes.
Considering the protecionism as you called it, It's all about a level playing field. EU companies enjoy only limited access to some foreign markets (China for instance). Whitin the EU there are rules to combat both intervention by the public authorities and state aid to companies (think of the Arab/turkye airline industry, Chinese R&D, building company's and tech ), these rules do not apply to players outside the EU to the same extent. Furthermore vital knowledge leaks out of the EU, while the EU companies do not have the same opportunities to gain similar knowledge from other third countries by means of takeovers. So it's more than logical that the EU protects businesses and vital infrastructure against takeovers.
The nation leaving the 28, is equivalent in size to 16 of them combined, so it's not quite as clear cut.And it seems that some on here see the Brexit negotiations allong the lines of a simple, partisan, battle between nations. If you leave out the nationalism, being pragmatic; it's both in the EU and the UK interest that they reach a deal.
Obviously the UK has all the right to negotiate a favourable trade deal. Except there are clear lines, the foundations of the European internal market for instance, the 4 freedoms; free movement of goods, capital, services and persons. If the UK doesn't wan't to adhere to those principles or other rules which guarantee a level playing field, well that's ok, but you can't have all the good without having the bad. And what's the point of the EU when the EU gives a third country favourable access and conditions, while at the same time that third country undermines EU principles and practices leveraging its position for instance as a sell out, a cheap back door to US and Chinese country's, or as a fiscal free haven.
You mentioned earlier that once the UK get's up to speed again the EU will need a deal with the UK. Don't you think that when 1 country leaves the trading bloc of 28 countries, the changes for that 1 country will be much bigger than for the other 27. In other words, the UK will need the EU as an export partner more than vice versa. That's simple logic, a simple calculation of the current trade volumes.
Considering the protecionism as you called it, It's all about a level playing field. EU companies enjoy only limited access to some foreign markets (China for instance). Whitin the EU there are rules to combat both intervention by the public authorities and state aid to companies (think of the Arab/turkye airline industry, Chinese R&D, building company's and tech ), these rules do not apply to players outside the EU to the same extent. Furthermore vital knowledge leaks out of the EU, while the EU companies do not have the same opportunities to gain similar knowledge from other third countries by means of takeovers. So it's more than logical that the EU protects businesses and vital infrastructure against takeovers.
Edited by DeltonaS on Friday 27th March 17:18
Yes, this is a UK centric opinion. But a deal is beneficial to both sides, and could be done IF the EC drops a number of red lines (fishing and the nonsense on equivalence). The EC may think they got a result when they used equivalence to bully the Swiss, but it doesnt really show them in good light, does it?
We dont want to benefit from the 4 freedoms, just a trade deal that is similar to Canada; without unfair strings. Proximity was a daft argument before Corona and looks dafter now. The 4 freedoms, have been part of European problem as ECB analysis shows. Freedom of movement hurts wage inflation (and I'm not referring to migrant workers but firms threatening to move production to cheaper locations in the bloc). They ain't all they are cracked up to be. And paying for those four freedoms is something the EU as a whole doesnt agree on right now, especially in a time of crisis....
Protecting your infrastructure from Chinese takeover is probably the correct play right now, but I dont see the likes of Vestager letting that one go (on prior form). Its going to screw with the WA as has disguising state aid through the banks.
Those banks are going to get bailed out at some point, more QE and negative rates are death. Of course they can pass them through - but that's gonna require changes to laws in Germany etc.
I want a deal, but at a time when the EU needed to be united in a negotiation, it isn't. And its gonna start breaking it's own rules.....
Helicopter123 said:
I think you are new?
Any non 'ultra' Brexit position on here is quickly jumped on by the usual suspects, a group 'pile on'.
Attempts at 'no-platforming' are sinister but luckily I'm just not intimidated.
I understand their agenda and call it out frequently, which they don't like, but in reality all I'm doing is holding up a mirror.
I may be new, but it doesn’t take much to understand your trolling and highly distasteful posts. Fortunately the mods have apparently dealt with them in the past and no doubt they will do so in the future if you continue in such a nasty manner.Any non 'ultra' Brexit position on here is quickly jumped on by the usual suspects, a group 'pile on'.
Attempts at 'no-platforming' are sinister but luckily I'm just not intimidated.
I understand their agenda and call it out frequently, which they don't like, but in reality all I'm doing is holding up a mirror.
Helicopter123 said:
crankedup said:
Murph7355 said:
Helicopter123 said:
Good job that the NHS has that extra £350m a week then, eh Boris?
Do you practice making yourself look an absolute nobber or does it come naturally? If it needs practice I bet you and everyone you know are glad you're having to self isolate right now.Helicopter123 said:
crankedup said:
Murph7355 said:
Helicopter123 said:
Good job that the NHS has that extra £350m a week then, eh Boris?
Do you practice making yourself look an absolute nobber or does it come naturally? If it needs practice I bet you and everyone you know are glad you're having to self isolate right now.B'stard Child said:
Garibaldi_red said:
Helicopter123 said:
Thank you, but I'm afraid that this is no laughing matter.
General concerns appears to be that you really are a laughing matter!
Sway said:
don'tbesilly said:
Are you suggesting that something suggested during the referendum back in 2016, now four years ago, can be used as ammunition against the Govt right now?
Especially with recent budgets, and emergency increases, taking us way beyond £350M a week extra... stongle said:
DeltonaS said:
You mentioned earlier that once the UK get's up to speed again the EU will need a deal with the UK. Don't you think that when 1 country leaves the trading bloc of 28 countries, the changes for that 1 country will be much bigger than for the other 27. In other words, the UK will need the EU as an export partner more than vice versa. That's simple logic, a simple calculation of the current trade volumes.
The nation leaving the 28, is equivalent in size to 16 of them combined, so it's not quite as clear cut.The UK's GDP per capita is less than that of the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Denmark and France. The UK's national debt per capita is higher than that of the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden and Austria.
The UK is a big trading partner for some in the EU, especially those in close proximity less so for many other nations. For the UK however the EU is it's biggest trading partner.
If there's one thing clear it's that there's quite a bit more at stake for the UK than for the EU. And that was my point.
DeltonaS said:
stongle said:
DeltonaS said:
You mentioned earlier that once the UK get's up to speed again the EU will need a deal with the UK. Don't you think that when 1 country leaves the trading bloc of 28 countries, the changes for that 1 country will be much bigger than for the other 27. In other words, the UK will need the EU as an export partner more than vice versa. That's simple logic, a simple calculation of the current trade volumes.
The nation leaving the 28, is equivalent in size to 16 of them combined, so it's not quite as clear cut.The UK's GDP per capita is less than that of the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Denmark and France. The UK's national debt per capita is higher than that of the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden and Austria.
The UK is a big trading partner for some in the EU, especially those in close proximity less so for many other nations. For the UK however the EU is it's biggest trading partner.
If there's one thing clear it's that there's quite a bit more at stake for the UK than for the EU. And that was my point.
That argument was lost. It was lost many times and in the end the biggest majority in 30yrs was given to a party stating they wanted to cut the nonsense in Parliament and simply get on with it. Traditional voting patterns were blown out of the water to do this.
Your previous post was stating things nobody on here had said.
A deal would be preferable, as long as it's a proper deal. Proper deals do indeed benefit both parties. Whether we can arrive at one remains to be seen.
Equally, as stongle notes, we have elected not to "benefit" from the 4 freedoms. Benefits are very, very context sensitive. And we've decided we do not want to avail ourselves of the benefits of the 4 freedoms any longer (while we're replaying 4yr old stale arguments, if you'd made a better case for them back then we wouldn't be here now
).The covid19 situation has shone a bright light on what real impacts are in a globalised world on geopolitical and macroeconomic grounds. Those bleating about Brexit and how destitute it would make us all need to take a long hard look at themselves now. None of us have ever known what is round the corner, and nor will we ever. The world is way more complex than the facile arguments that were presented.
Scale is not always a benefit. Agility and being able to focus on a much more specific set of requirements can often be far more preferable, especially in times as rough as those we are in now. Scale can be a real downside, especially when large parts of that scale are dead limbs. Let's see what we can do with that.
Meanwhile, what do you think the EU will do to try and solve it's fiscal imbalances and the fairly major cracks there appear to be with Italy etc?
DeltonaS said:
The UK is a big trading partner for some in the EU, especially those in close proximity less so for many other nations. For the UK however the EU is it's biggest trading partner.
If there's one thing clear it's that there's quite a bit more at stake for the UK than for the EU. And that was my point.
I didn't say otherwise. Trade doesnt dry up just because we are no longer part of the "EU". Too many think its digital, it's not.If there's one thing clear it's that there's quite a bit more at stake for the UK than for the EU. And that was my point.
As Murph says, being agile and other benefits of leave suit the UK; we do not want to be part of a federal structure. It's an arrogant argument to think we want the 4 freedoms, when we have demonstrated democratically we choose not too. Personally I dont see an issue with worker migration, but freedom of movement is abused by firms in collective wage bargaining - and that's an issue.
We wanted to be part of a Common Market that the UK was instrumental in setting up with Germany, but what come since has not sat well with many in the UK.
Trying to wrap the divergent economic and social needs of 28 nations into one bloc was a difficult IF not impossible. We can see the economic cracks, if they split open there is no telling what the mess looks like (other than bad). Likewise much of the social agenda, is seeing push back across the EU. It's not a Nirvana.
The UK needs to look introspectively of it's own problems. An inflection point of leaving the EU put many traditional ideas under the spotlight and we have seen huge political shifts. Ideally these will allow us to focus on our much maligned productivity issues, with a change to the fiscal landscape. The construct of the UK due to government policies on spend and gravitational pull of London would have taken many decades to resolve / distribute.
Oh, and extreme divergence is only a fear factor nonsense argument. We are only going to diverge on standards if necessary, and in many areas we have much higher standards (prudential for one). We have proposed landing zones, but the EC doesnt want to give up its Bully sticks yet. Mistakes have been made globally in the past, but reliance on explicit rather than implicit regulatory guidance in many industries is why the EU will continue to have major issues in FS and other sectors. By herding too many cats, you cant see the forest for the trees (and that's aligned with ECB thinking on the economy). Maybe the new global situation will prompt a rethink. Or maybe a double down, the later is a political over economic decision.
You are only looking at it from the EU perspective...
Edited by stongle on Saturday 28th March 07:41
DeltonaS said:
stongle said:
DeltonaS said:
You mentioned earlier that once the UK get's up to speed again the EU will need a deal with the UK. Don't you think that when 1 country leaves the trading bloc of 28 countries, the changes for that 1 country will be much bigger than for the other 27. In other words, the UK will need the EU as an export partner more than vice versa. That's simple logic, a simple calculation of the current trade volumes.
The nation leaving the 28, is equivalent in size to 16 of them combined, so it's not quite as clear cut.The UK's GDP per capita is less than that of the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Denmark and France. The UK's national debt per capita is higher than that of the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden and Austria.
The UK is a big trading partner for some in the EU, especially those in close proximity less so for many other nations. For the UK however the EU is it's biggest trading partner.
If there's one thing clear it's that there's quite a bit more at stake for the UK than for the EU. And that was my point.
The “we’re bigger than 16” is junk rhetoric worthy only of Kipper and Brexit Central fantasy propaganda sites.
And then we’re into the distorted world view that can’t see all 4 freedoms as, well freedoms and hence benefits.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff